Apple probably sells north of 300-350 million devices with ARM SoC’s in them, which comes out to the neighborhood of $100 million for ARM. That’s a big chunk of change.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Report: Apple Pays Less Than 30 Cents in Royalties to Arm Per Chip
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exactly! Apple has shown with the M chips, that ARM was just as good as an ISA as X86. The attention ARM has gotten after the M chips are probably wort a lot to ARM!
If Apple had their own way.. they would build from the ground their own architecture for SoC and the software. A completely walled off design thats all their own. its why they had lightning, its why they made the butterfly keyboard (despite it being a fail)...
They want to do their own thing, on their own terms. They probably have teams working on these things right now, even if they never see the light of day. And others at Apple would have no idea about it.
They want to do their own thing, on their own terms. They probably have teams working on these things right now, even if they never see the light of day. And others at Apple would have no idea about it.
I agree - I saw that earlier this year - like 30%? of the proffered shares or something like that? https://www.cnbc.com/2023/09/06/app...or-chip-technology-that-goes-beyond-2040.html
“SoftBank is the owner of Arm, and in 2017, the company's CEO gathered Arm executives and explained that Apple pays more for the piece of plastic that used to be used to protect the screens of new iPhones than it does to license Arm's intellectual property.”
There is no way that throwaway piece of plastic is 30 cents
There is no way that throwaway piece of plastic is 30 cents
most app developers qualify for 15% Small Business cut. it's the ones that make over $1,000,000 a year that have to pay 30%. And if after moving from 15 to 30% they dont make $1,000,000 in a calendar year they can re-qualify for 15%.
So based on your post, you don't know what you're talking about.
Yes I'm aware before a few years again (no more than 5?) apple took a 30% cut no matter what, but at least they changed their tune (before they were forced to). But as it stands right now, you are wrong in your assessment.
Here'a link you can read up on the Small Business Program. Also the article mistakes the 15% a bit, it doesn't only apply to IAPs, but generally for Apps sold too.
Passion IO Article about Small Business Program
Arm specifies the arm architecture and its extensions, but only designs some of the implementations.
One random rumor is that Apple told Arm exactly how they wished to do a 64-bit RISC architecture (or were secretly already implementing in silicon?). Arm offered to do a copy-and-paste from Apple's "wish list" into Arm's new armv8 architecture document. Perhaps Apple then said "great", and offered in return to extended a license fee agreement covering both 32 and 64-bit arm architectures for multiple years.
Apple had plenty of 64-bit expertise in house after acquiring P.A.Semi (which included some of the designers of the pioneering DEC Alpha 64-bit RISC) circa 2008.
Last edited:
Apparently, they only went public on 14th September 2023. Raising prices is not the best way to increase value. Increasing prices is a short term solution to greed versus building the business being long term To add value to a company.
It is not.
Apple strives to make the world a better place through investing in technology, people and the environment. The more money Apple makes, the more the world benefits from its global leadership and incredible innovation.
I'm ok with this.
It's a symbiotic relationship for both parties.
Article is just ragebait.
It's a symbiotic relationship for both parties.
Article is just ragebait.
" SoftBank's attempts to renegotiate Arm's deal with Apple to raise royalty rates were apparently unsuccessful."
Really? Let's take this contract that is in place and let's renegotiate it so that it benefits my client (ARM) more than you (Apple)? And it was unsuccessful? SHOCKER!
Really? Let's take this contract that is in place and let's renegotiate it so that it benefits my client (ARM) more than you (Apple)? And it was unsuccessful? SHOCKER!
That’s a good example when having a client “grandfathered in” ends up biting you in the apple.
Not sure how that’s a thing. ARM have been elevated greatly if nothing else but by the exposure from Apples wonderful implementation of ARM. That’s why so many are trying to copy it now. Even with all the great things ARM may have accomplished, Apple have shown what is possible which can lead to a very lucrative roadmap for ARM.
SoftBank is the owner of Arm, and in 2017, the company's CEO gathered Arm executives and explained that Apple pays more for the piece of plastic that used to be used to protect the screens of new iPhones than it does to license Arm's intellectual property. SoftBank's attempts to renegotiate Arm's deal with Apple to raise royalty rates were apparently unsuccessful.
While Apple is unlikely to sever its ties with Arm, the company has apparently explored the long-term possibility of using a competing open-source technology for its chips called RISC-V. Apple's current licensing agreement with Arm was signed in September and it "extends beyond 2040," but the chip architect is said to have continually attempted to renegotiate its financial terms.
So how I read this is:
- Softbank/Arm, 6+ years ago (we don't know when the first license agreement was signed), tried to convince the Arm executives that they got a bad (or at least not-so-great) deal. Arm didn't do anything about it and obviously simply COULD NOT because it was a signed deal. Fine.
- "the company has apparently explored the long-term possibility of using a competing open-source technology for its chips called RISC-V." Who? Apple or Arm? This is ambiguous.
- 6 year later (Sep 2023), Apple and Arm signed a licensing agreement that goes beyond 2040 (another 16+ years) HOWEVER, there are no pricing details on what that new agreement entails. So it could be simply a renewal for $.30/chip or it could be $1.86/chip for all we know.
Come on, MR...do a better job reporting rather than clickbaiting and providing lack of thoroughness.
So, what you’re after is for MR to preface the story by saying, "we do not have the specific details of the in-confidence contract, however, it is reported that…". Or not report on it at all. This is by definition and name, a rumours website.
But I take your point. The entire site, whilst often having good information, is a click bait site, also by definition.
Yes, what you said is true. However, ARM is still a business that needs to make money and grow. I assume they have investors who are putting pressure on them to do so. So in four years, expect that pressure to lead to an agreement much more favorable towards ARM than now. Apple will probably give in because as we just learned about Apple abandoning their modem endeavor, Apple is better off sticking to what works and the companies that make that possible.
arm signed a stupid 15+ year contract, it’s totally on them, Apple isn’t going to negotiate further when they got a long contract that benefits them so much.
Who even signs contracts that long? The Apple negotiators must’ve been laughing so hard after getting that signature.
Who even signs contracts that long? The Apple negotiators must’ve been laughing so hard after getting that signature.
Whilst a fair deal for all (whatever fair means) is best, ARM would be better off keeping Apple in its corner, rather than treating them just like another customer. Consider Googles approach on 'sponsoring' Apple to use their Search Engine as default.
I'm guessing Apple aren’t fans of increased subscriptions costs. Who knew?
Not only this, but it’s a gateway drug for ARM. Our entire software stack is now aarch64-capable since most the of the devs are on Macs. There was a lot of initial pain, but we can also flip the switch on ARM servers (and devices) now without any pushback.
The equation never made sense before, but by adding just a little friction for the devs initially, we’re now able to go full steam ahead with ARM.
30% is standard across the board for platform holders. EPIC is trying to undercut this, but their online store is losing money so it's not sustainable. If EPIC doesn't increase their subscriber growth rate and raise prices then they will be out of business. If they didn't have other revenue streams, like Fortnite and their engine fees, their store would already be out of business.
And not only that, but Apple is proving AAA gaming can be done on ARM. And because ARM is immune to graphics chips demands put on by bitcoin mining and AI models, it could one day soon offer better gaming performance per dollar than current architecture.
This one had me laugh out loud! No Apple were not the first with an ARM powered smart phone, not by several years actually, one example of many:
Ericsson - R380s
The R380 was announced in 1999 and was offered in three variants. The unit owned by the Mobile Phone Museum is the most common variant - the R380s - the...
www.mobilephonemuseum.com
The iPhone was just an evolution of years and years of smart phones. It wasn't the first ever one.
And the ARM tech was most certainly NOT made for the Newton 😂
Last edited: